BuILdInG Up ThE DeMoCrAts

I really really like Howard Dean. I think he elevates debate to a new level - one on which issues and problems are actually addressed, rather than propagandized. He also has an amazing ability to get people involved, interested, and motivated. Having him as chairman of the DNC makes me feel a little more confident that change is not only possible, but inevitable.

I guess it's because there is a part of me that believes (correctly or incorrectly) that a lot of people out there are uninformed, and if they were just better informed, they wouldn't have voted for the Bush administration again. When I hear right-wing talk radio, I want to tear my hair out because I imagine people all across the nation listening to it and thinking that they are hearing intelligent and open debate, when in fact, they are hearing an extremely biased one-sided view of reality. So that part is me is hopeful when I recieve emails like the following from the DNC:

Let's Build a Truly National Party

Every four years, a few months before the presidential election, the Democratic Party puts staff and resources on the ground in a few battleground states ... and then they're gone. After November the whole operation disappears.

Then, four years later, we do the same thing all over again.

That hasn't worked. And I ran for chairman on a promise to do it another way.

So a few days ago I met with the state party chairs, and we made a decision together. For the first time ever we're going to build for the future by putting staff and resources on the ground early -- starting in 2005, not 2008. The first four states: North Dakota, Missouri, North Carolina and West Virginia.

How soon the next 46 states get moving depends on you -- can you make a contribution now?

http://www.democrats.org/50states

[...]

The Republican Party isn't waiting. They have been building for years, and every day that slips by means another opportunity missed.

This is your time. This is your challenge. Let's get to work -- together.

Thank you.

Governor Howard Dean, M.D.
Chairman, Democratic National Committee

I do sort of wonder, though, if we (Democrats) are making ourselves look bad by agreeing with the perception that we are disorganized and that's why we've lost the last two elections. It's not like we've never won an election before. Do we think that all Democratic presidents ended up in the White House by sheer luck, while all Republican ones have gotten there because of their clear message and the organizational power of the RNC? What do you think?

Comments

[Malnurtured Snay]

I think the Republican Party has shot itself in the foot in the last few months -- and the continued fracturing of moderate Republicans from the party that continues to whore itself to the religious right -- provides an excellent opportunity for an organized Democratic Party, with a message of state and individual rights, as well as fiscal responsibility, to sweep elections in '06.

[ianqui]

I think that if the candidate has sufficient charisma--like Clinton did--he might be able to overcome any party disorganization. Alternatively (perhaps), the Republicans are going strong because the party's strong, and can wash out the shortcomings of their candidates. So does that mean we always need to have a super-charismatic candidate since the party's taking a long time to change? I hope not.

I agree with Snay--I think the Repubs are going to self-destruct by the end of this term ('06 or '08, I'm not sure). I predict that the country will be in a terrible financial crisis by '08, and you know what that means for the party in power.

[kirsten]

MY G*D, I so hope you guys can pull it off for '08.

I was reading this article just last night:

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/17852

And despairing about the state of things down your way, so it's heartening to know that there are rumblings afoot for the Dems. I think it's safe to say that you pretty much have the rest of the world backing you. We sweat and wait, biting our fingernails, hoping it's not too late and that things are not quite as bad as they seem...

[Barbara]

I resolve to become a more organized Democrat during the coming 3.5 years. :D I tell you, I sure have been writing more letters to my representatives than ever before.

[Jeff Price]

My guess is that it’s not only democrats who believe that if people were better informed about their positions then others would be convinced. I would venture to say that anyone who affiliates themselves with an organization of any type wants to believe that to be true. None of us wants to think that there are real problems with our message that is lacking the capability of convincing others.

Depending upon what you are listening to be it right-wing talk show hosts or left-wing ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN & NPR you are probably already listening because there is a bend towards the message you already like to hear. When you listen to the other side, it probably has more to do with curiosity over what “they” are saying.

My perception of the results of the last two elections is that they didn’t turn out the way they did because a state’s electoral votes were hijacked or the voters were uninformed or that one party’s message was clear while the other’s wasn’t. The results came out of our democratic republican process, which yields the will of the majority of the people based on the population densities in their home states.

I could make surmises of world opinion, wishful hopes for the future, destructive comments about a person’s religion or lack there of and believe that voters are uninformed. However in this day and age of information overload, the truth found in Scripture, the inability to see into the future and the fickleness of world opinion, I’d rather not.

I can just as easily say that those that don’t believe in the Gospel message of hope, faith and love are just uninformed about the teachings of Jesus Christ. But that isn’t true either.

[Malnurtured Snay]

Y'know, you're really good at saying a lot, but not really saying anything at all.

I read and listen to a great deal of "conservative" media (radio, blogs, etc.), and the feeling that I've been getting is that a lot of traditionally conservative folks - small government, fiscal responsibility, state's rights - have been feeling increasingly betrayed by a Republican Party that they feel has bent over and taken it up the ass for the so-called Religious Right.

The Republican Party is no longer the party of choice for the conservatives and the libertarians. There is a fairly large group of people who have either abandoned the party altogether, or who will be open-minded to other non-GOP candidates in the future.

The Republican Party is no longer the party of Reagan. Maybe it one day will be again. But its abandoned the conservative principles it once stood for, and folks on the right are recognizing that. And unless Republican leaders tell the Religious Right to sit down and shut the fuck up, the Republican Party is going to continue to crumple.

[seadragon]

Jeff,

"I can just as easily say that those that don't believe in the Gospel message of hope, faith and love are just uninformed about the teachings of Jesus Christ. But that isn't true either."

You know, that sentence made a surprising amount of sense to me. In fact, when I wrote "I guess it's because there is a part of me that believes (correctly or incorrectly) that a lot of people out there are uninformed, and if they were just better informed, they wouldn't have voted for the Bush administration again", the reason I put the "correctly or incorrectly" part in there is because I suspect I am wrong in many cases. There are, of course, many informed people out there who just happen to interpret things (very) differently than I do. You, for example. :) So, you're right, it's not about convincing those people who are already informed and still have very different viewpoints.

Still. Just as evangical Christians don't want to give up getting their message out there even though there are a lot of people who disagree with them, neither should the Democrats give up. :)

On a slightly different topic, I have a question for you that is something I've been wondering about for a while. Everyone talks about media being left-leaning and they cite them as you did: "left-wing ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN & NPR". And they tend to consider them to be the left's equivalent to the right-leaning talk shows. But what I wonder is, what is your reaction when you listen to the news on any of these channels? Do you have the same hair-tearing-out reaction that I described when I listen to right-wing talk radio? My feeling is that the left-leaning media is as you have described it - "a bend towards the message you already like to hear" - but that right-leaning media leans much farther. But I don't know, which is why I'm asking you (the only right-leaning person who comments here, I think). I mean, if the left-wing media (being the news outlets you've identified) is as bad for you as right-wing talk radio is for me, how do you ever stand to watch any of it?

[Malnurtured Snay]

Er. Uh. This line -> "Y'know, you're really good at saying a lot, but not really saying anything at all" not directed at BaLtiMoRe RoLL. :)

[Jeff Price]

Seadragon,

I’m glad that stood out to you. The tension between having information and viewing it through our worldview lens does certainly cause us to draw different conclusions. The Gospel teaches more than just a litany of facts that one processes through their mind. It requires your heart to process the message as well.

The tension between the worldview of humans being essentially good versus being essentially bad also plays a role here. Christians continue to preach their message not because they believe that they will convince you of their argument, but because it is our hope the Lord will use that message to transform hearts. To take that which is essentially bad and cover it with the righteousness of Jesus Christ (2 Corinthians 5:21).

As to your media inquiry, it is funny you say, “but that right-leaning media leans much farther.” I have made the exact opposite statement about left-leaning media. Here is the difference as I see it, and yes listening to those cited media sources does tend to make my blood boil. The difference to me is that the right-leaning talk shows do not hide what they are. They come out and say they are conservative, this is what they believe, here is what is going on in the world and here is their point-of-view. Those other sources deny having any affiliation/bias what-so-ever and purport they are presenting news just as facts.

[Malnurtured Snay]

Jeff,

I think you're quite mistaken there - often I'll watch CNN or NBC and wonder, "Where the hell is the liberal bias?" I just don't see it, no matter how often I hear folks rant and rave about it.

(Really, I think many folks on the right feel the need to cast themselves as "political victims", and portraying the media as having an unfriendly bias puts them on the defensive, and allows you to get away with more than what you could otherwise).

OTOH, you talk about right-wing media being honest with their bias - you have, I assume, noticed that FOX's motto is "fair and balanced" and not "biased whore for the right?"

[anonymouscoworker]

I have to disagree with Jeff on the fact that right-wing news sources are clear about how right wing they are. I think they primarily identify themselves as moderates, and voices of the majority. Even if they are voices of the majority, it's a very thin majority, and they're certainly not moderates.

And how do you explain how pissed I get at the so called "left leaning" meadia outlets? I feel that they slant right, not left, and I would consider myself a staunch libertarian.

My big issue is that the Limbaughs, O'Reillys, Carlsons, Medveds, Coulters, Hannitys, Ingrahams, Scarboroughs and all the rest like to play like they're not Republicans. They like to say that they don't follow the president lock-step in everything they do and say, but it's just not true. Frequently, they can be found repeating verbatim GOP talking points.

On the other hand, the Blitzers, Rathers, Brokaws, etc. don't regurgitate Democrat party talking points (though they may lean to the left in their personal convictions), and can be more frequently found repeating the myths, falsehoods, smears, and outright lies of Republicans.

The media is slanted, yes, but it's not slanted to the left.

[Malnurtured Snay]

Ah, what good timing - if you go over to The Blue Bus, you'll see an example of what ACW is talking about. Real quick here ...

Katie Couric tried to use some right-wing talking points on Bill Clinton, calling the Democrats "obstructionists" for blocking 10 of Bush's judicial nominees. Clinton retorted that this is absolute nonesense considering the Republicans blocked 4 times as many of his nominees just on the Court of Appeals! There is video of the exchange at the link below. These right-wing extremist lies and attempts to re-write history need to stop, and shame on Katie Couric for playing right along. Damn that "liberal" media!

(why does html not work here? argh!)

[Malnurtured Snay]

(I guess HTML just doesn't work in the preview ... whoooops)

[Romarkin]

Ah, you kids! I remember thinking when Nixon resigned, "Who's ever gonna vote for the Republicans after Nixon? The Republican Party is finished!" I now think that the Democrat party is finished. Why? Because all the Dems stood for was Unions, and Unions are washed up, kaput. Kerry was a better man than Shrub, but lost big-time anyway- because the Dems don't know what they stand for anymore. Are they for free trade or agin' it? How about Kerry going hunting? That was a scream!